Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

> If a list was put together of all the horses that were purchased at
> killer  prices at the auctions comparing those that were like Skips, to
> those that  didn't amount to anything, which would be the longer list?
> The
> "unfortunate" part is that we all hear about those few that beat the
> odds,  but no one talks much about the ones that didn't.
Too true, Lif.  On the front lines, the vets DO get to see the ones that
fail--or should I say, the ones that manage to get far enough to start a
few rides and THEN wash out.  I wish more vets tried to look at trends
like that, since the ones who vet multiple rides in the same area are in a
terrific position to see this happen, but not enough do.

The other thing that stands out is that most of the ones who DO succeed,
like Skip's, are bred much like many of the other successful horses, and
have merely hit upon hard times and have resurfaced.

Getting successes from the killer auction IS very much like the classical
fairy tale--it isn't a matter of a peasant becoming the King--it is a
matter of a prince that was switched at birth and raised as a peasant that
is eventually discovered and becomes King.  The very few folks that I've
known who have been reasonably successful at picking up auction horses and
turning them into endurance horses have also gone the route of studying
what breeding consistently does well, and they look for that breeding at
the auctions as well.  When one finds such horses at the auctions, more
power to them for rescuing them and putting them to work in the world
where they belong.  The point that has been driven home to me time and
time again, though, is that it takes knowledge of what makes a good horse
coming from breeders who produce same with relative consistency to be able
to pick these sorts of horses out at auction.  And again, the scarcity of
such horses in the gene pool today also means that they are becoming very
scarce at auction, whereas even 20 years ago one could find them with some
degree of regularity because they USED to be the norm in the breeding
barn, and were shunted aside in favor of the fads.  Now the norm at the
auctions is more usually the dross from the mixed-bag "cult of the sire"
modern breeding practices, where there may be a few famous names in the
pedigrees but no rhyme or reason to why the horse has been bred.  Since
many ARE mixed-source horses, one may still find the occasional one that
does throw back to its "using" ancestors--but the odds are greatly
reduced.

Linda mentioned the Bey Shah horses--I don't usually like to talk about
specific lines here, but he's an interesting one.  He himself is a
mixed-source horse, and on paper, has some interesting possibilities.  He
also was an "extreme" himself and was promoted as a show sire because that
was what he tended to throw.  I lived and vetted for nearly two decades in
the heart of Bey Shah country--the NW.  I can't begin to count the numbers
of
Bey Shah offspring and grand-get that I saw at rides--a phenomenal number.
Just by the law of averages, a bunch of them should have been successful,
but very few were.  They were among the horses who finally taught me to
look at bodies, and how bodies can make horses go lame.

That said, an occasional one DID do well--Saxx was a good example,
although he had a pretty short career, despite his stellar wins.  But when
you looked at the individuals that did, it was clear that they did not
greatly resemble the "average" of the group, and indeed threw back to
those ancestors "on paper" from which one would expect good performance.

As breeding horses, the throwbacks from such breedings have somewhat
better odds than their more extreme siblings, since they do actually
possess the desired traits to a large degree, but not as good odds as the
horses with more consistent breeding, since they are still apt to carry
some of the genetics of the "extreme" part of their breeding.  Simple math
and genetics there, not anybody's opinion, least of all mine.  Contrary to
what a handful of folks are trying to read into my posts, I'm not talking
about any "gospel according to Heidi" here--I'm merely pointing out some
of the realities of breeding, so that those interested can learn from the
successes, mistakes, and research of those who have gone before, and can
have the opportunity to put more facts on the table before they make up
their minds--whether it is about breeding or buying, regardless of the
source.  It took mentoring from equine geneticists and breeders more savvy
than me to help me to understand the phenomena I was observing in the
trenches, and I'm certainly glad that others took the time and had the
patience to help me understand some of the dynamics of genetics.  Thanks
to all of you who DO realize that in passing on this information, I'm not
trying to belittle anybody or "enforce" a way of thinking, but instead am
just trying to help folks to understand the horse selection process on a
deeper level with the end goal of having happier, healthier endurance
horses out on the trail.

Heidi



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp

Ride Long and Ride Safe!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=